1968 Ford 17 vs. 2006 Nissan Hardbody
To start off, 2006 Nissan Hardbody is newer by 38 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Ford 17. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Ford 17 would be higher. At 2,293 cc (6 cylinders), 1968 Ford 17 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 123 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 1968 Ford 17 (185 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 11 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Nissan Hardbody. (174 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 1968 Ford 17 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Nissan Hardbody.
Compare all specifications:
| 1968 Ford 17 | 2006 Nissan Hardbody | |
| Make | Ford | Nissan |
| Model | 17 | Hardbody |
| Year Released | 1968 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2293 cc | 1998 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 123 HP | 123 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Torque | 185 Nm | 174 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3200 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 3 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2960 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 41 L | 90 L |
